But it's much cheaper to mass produce organisms that perform electrolysis than to build solar panels.
Especially if the organism is photosynthetic (like the algae they mention). Add water, carbon, nitrate sources, and plenty of sunlight. And the organisms are easily transportable (unlike a bulky solar panel).
The line for 'competing financial interests' isn't as concise as you state. For example, a professor in my department receives over a million per year from a big pharma to do research. The results of that research are reviewed by other scientists in his field. His research directly helps the big pharma, but that's a perfectly acceptable 'interest'.
The pharma company doesn't review the papers for publication...other, independent scientists in the same field do.
Where is the line for 'competing financial interests'? How about a scientist who both works for a company and publishes a paper supporting that company's product. The publication directly affects the income of the company by promoting the product. Reviewers will pay close attention to the paper to make sure the science is good. But having the competing financial interest is not instantly grounds for rejection of the paper.
The question is not where the money comes from. The question is whether the science is true or not. That's all that matters in the end. Everything else is perception.
From the article, "[they] were told to hand over not only raw data but personal financial information, information on grants received and distributed, and computer codes."
I think the scientists were mainly incensed over the request of personal financial information and not their funding sources, computer codes, or raw data.
In fact, ANYONE who requests the materials and methods of a published work is usually given them. In order to verify and repeat the results of the work, other scientists need that information.
But, I think the two zany Republicans overstepped their bounds by asking for personal financial information. They're clearly looking for a relationship between the scientists and some environmental organization (the wackier the better). I doubt these guys took personal money from their research grants. But the Republicans seem intent on spinning the published work in any way they can: discredit its authors, its methods, and its funding sources.
Though, the attempt to discredit their methods is not unusual nor wrong! Science is all about critically questioning the work of others until you are convinced of their correct results.
Ah, but he did not say accelleration. He said inertia. He's referring to the conservation of momentum.
For example, before and after a collision or some other change in force the momentum of the body is conserved. m1v1 = m2v2 (assuming fully elastic; m = mass, v = velocity). If the soldier is running and suddenly needs to stop, he will have a lot of inertia. Diving to the ground might break his back. Changing direction while mid-stride would also pose a challenge.
There's been plenty of times, especially during storms, that my cell phone loses calls. And then you get tower malfunctions, interference, and other transient effects. It's certainly not 99.999%.:)
Many of my friends do so. We're still in (graduate) school, we change apartments yearly or bi-yearly, and we need a cell phone anyways. I don't have a land line and I have never regretted its absence.
A lot of people have already lost their land line and are now using just cell phones. Service on cell phones is certainly not 99.99999%, nor even 94.8% (my guess). But people still use them vs. a land line.
So, when you're comparing service availabity, cost, and features, you need to include cell phones as the dominant competitor.
Really, your grandma won't be switching to VOIP. If anyone, it'll be people who already have a cell phone and want a cheap long-distance service as their land line. If they need to call 911, they'll be using their cell.
The people who develope these formats are used to dealing with large data sets that need to be read and written fast. I've seen terabyte files used as inputs/outputs for scientific computing applications. They've certainly thought about the fastest ways of doing I/O. You can even substitute your own FFIO routines (people using Crays do this).
You can set the buffer to whatever you want and it really depends on your computing architecture on how buffering is handled. Normally, the data is kept in memory until flushed or until the file is closed.
If you have more questions, check out their websites and send emails to their mailing lists.
NetCDF and HDF5 are optimized binary file formats for storing incredibly large amounts of data and quickly retrieving it.
I'm more familiar with NetCDF (because I use it) so let me tell you some of the things it can do. (HDF5 can also do these things, I'm sure).
With NetCDF, you can store +2 gigabyte files on a 32 bit machine (it supports Large File support). I've saved 12 gigabyte files with no problems. It supports both sequential and direct access, meaning you can read and write either starting from the beginning of the file or at any point in the middle of the file.
The format is array-based. You define dimensions of arrays and variables consisting of zero, one, or more dimensions. You can also define attributes that are used as metadata, information describing the data inside your variables.
You can read or write slices of your data, including strides and hyperslabs. This allows you to read/write only the data you're interested in and makes disk access much faster.
It's also easy to use with good APIs. They have APIs for C, Fortran95, C++, MATLAB, Python, Perl, Java, and Ruby.
Take a look at it. It might be what you're looking for.
I can't wait for 1000+ Cells in a mainframe. Do you know what the heat output is? It's based on Power4 (?) and the clock speeds are relatively low (?) so it shouldn't be too high.
Hopefully, they'll (IBM probably) develop some compilers for it (C, Fortran at least) so the scientific community can take advantage of the Cells.
You should read the history instead of blindly justifying your own opinion:
After Moses brought down the Ten Commandments from Mount Sinai, he set up a system of courts and judges to rule over the some 40,000 Jewish people traveling over the desert. One of the punishments was, yes indeed, the death penalty. If someone commits murder, you can't give them life in prison when there are no prisons, no guards, and no time or resources enough for either.
You can subjectively argue about the modern interpretation of the Ten Commandments, but the fact is: Killing was an acceptable punishment for murder, adultery, treason, and other extreme felonies in the ancient era. And, depending on where you live, it continues to be one in modern times.
I've used the command line option from a remote terminal, but I wonder how much functionality still works without the GUI. Can you still plot figures/etc? Something to try.
Strangely enough, Matlab is written in Java and its port to Solaris is SLOOOOW as hell. Literally, it's 10x slower on a Sunblade 1000 than an equivalent x86.
You'd think Sun would have a good JVM on their own hardware, but the reality is that it sucks.
My research group is switching to Linux because 1) the software runs faster and 2) PCs/w Linux are cheaper than Sun hardware/w Solaris.
I use Fortran95 for scientific computing and the sophistication of newer compilers reduces the amount of time needed for debugging.
For example, a simple compiler won't check for writing to non-existent array elements, but a good compiler will, making one of the most onerous of bugs easily found.
The Fortran95/2k language itself is very optimized for performance. If Fortress isn't likewise optimized for performance, then many scientists/engineers will not switch. If it takes them a month to learn the language and then 10x the time to run the programs, it will vastly exceed the fraction of debugging time. (Especially since there's a lot of good bug-free Fortran code out there.)
Your engine burns fuel to make your car go. The work of moving the car comes from burning the fuel, but the engine is not a 100% converter of fuel to work and releases heat as a byproduct. There is a maximum efficiency of any engine based on the temperature of the engine and the outside air.
It's the older one. LAPack is the newer one. I still don't understand why you're ranting about this.
Uh, the program could be very simple. Create a randomized A matrix (1 million x 1 million). Create a randomized b matrix (1 million). Solve for x, Ax=b, using LAPACK. If that's too difficult for the guy, then maybe he shouldn't be in charge of a major computing center. Or he can tell someone else to do it.
Solving it (using Gaussian elim or another of LAPACK's subroutines)would stress all components of the processor (not just an idle loop as many have proposed).
And you do realize that a library is just a collection of subroutines, right? Nothing special about it. (Or do you program at all???)
LinPack also exists. From Linpack's website, "LINPACK was designed for supercomputers in use in the 1970s and early 1980s. LINPACK has been largely superceded by LAPACK, which has been designed to run efficiently on shared-memory, vector supercomputers."
But, dude, why the hate? These are subroutines that solve specifically defined linear algebra problems. They happen to consume a large amount of cpu time for large scale problems. So why the reply? Or are you just trying to flamebait?
Slashdot Mirror
But it's much cheaper to mass produce organisms that perform electrolysis than to build solar panels.
Especially if the organism is photosynthetic (like the algae they mention). Add water, carbon, nitrate sources, and plenty of sunlight. And the organisms are easily transportable (unlike a bulky solar panel).
The line for 'competing financial interests' isn't as concise as you state. For example, a professor in my department receives over a million per year from a big pharma to do research. The results of that research are reviewed by other scientists in his field. His research directly helps the big pharma, but that's a perfectly acceptable 'interest'.
The pharma company doesn't review the papers for publication...other, independent scientists in the same field do.
Where is the line for 'competing financial interests'? How about a scientist who both works for a company and publishes a paper supporting that company's product. The publication directly affects the income of the company by promoting the product. Reviewers will pay close attention to the paper to make sure the science is good. But having the competing financial interest is not instantly grounds for rejection of the paper.
The question is not where the money comes from. The question is whether the science is true or not. That's all that matters in the end. Everything else is perception.
From the article, "[they] were told to hand over not only raw data but personal financial information, information on grants received and distributed, and computer codes."
I think the scientists were mainly incensed over the request of personal financial information and not their funding sources, computer codes, or raw data.
In fact, ANYONE who requests the materials and methods of a published work is usually given them. In order to verify and repeat the results of the work, other scientists need that information.
But, I think the two zany Republicans overstepped their bounds by asking for personal financial information. They're clearly looking for a relationship between the scientists and some environmental organization (the wackier the better). I doubt these guys took personal money from their research grants. But the Republicans seem intent on spinning the published work in any way they can: discredit its authors, its methods, and its funding sources.
Though, the attempt to discredit their methods is not unusual nor wrong! Science is all about critically questioning the work of others until you are convinced of their correct results.
Ah, but he did not say accelleration. He said inertia. He's referring to the conservation of momentum.
For example, before and after a collision or some other change in force the momentum of the body is conserved. m1v1 = m2v2 (assuming fully elastic; m = mass, v = velocity). If the soldier is running and suddenly needs to stop, he will have a lot of inertia. Diving to the ground might break his back. Changing direction while mid-stride would also pose a challenge.
There's been plenty of times, especially during storms, that my cell phone loses calls. And then you get tower malfunctions, interference, and other transient effects. It's certainly not 99.999%. :)
Many of my friends do so. We're still in (graduate) school, we change apartments yearly or bi-yearly, and we need a cell phone anyways. I don't have a land line and I have never regretted its absence.
A lot of people have already lost their land line and are now using just cell phones. Service on cell phones is certainly not 99.99999%, nor even 94.8% (my guess). But people still use them vs. a land line.
So, when you're comparing service availabity, cost, and features, you need to include cell phones as the dominant competitor.
Really, your grandma won't be switching to VOIP. If anyone, it'll be people who already have a cell phone and want a cheap long-distance service as their land line. If they need to call 911, they'll be using their cell.
-Howard
Hear Hear!
Mod the parent up!
Duh. It was all Al Gore.
The people who develope these formats are used to dealing with large data sets that need to be read and written fast. I've seen terabyte files used as inputs/outputs for scientific computing applications. They've certainly thought about the fastest ways of doing I/O. You can even substitute your own FFIO routines (people using Crays do this).
You can set the buffer to whatever you want and it really depends on your computing architecture on how buffering is handled. Normally, the data is kept in memory until flushed or until the file is closed.
If you have more questions, check out their websites and send emails to their mailing lists.
NetCDF and HDF5 are optimized binary file formats for storing incredibly large amounts of data and quickly retrieving it.
I'm more familiar with NetCDF (because I use it) so let me tell you some of the things it can do. (HDF5 can also do these things, I'm sure).
With NetCDF, you can store +2 gigabyte files on a 32 bit machine (it supports Large File support). I've saved 12 gigabyte files with no problems. It supports both sequential and direct access, meaning you can read and write either starting from the beginning of the file or at any point in the middle of the file.
The format is array-based. You define dimensions of arrays and variables consisting of zero, one, or more dimensions. You can also define attributes that are used as metadata, information describing the data inside your variables.
You can read or write slices of your data, including strides and hyperslabs. This allows you to read/write only the data you're interested in and makes disk access much faster.
It's also easy to use with good APIs. They have APIs for C, Fortran95, C++, MATLAB, Python, Perl, Java, and Ruby.
Take a look at it. It might be what you're looking for.
-Howard Salis
Say Good Bye to Mr. Fandango....
... Everything.
The only thing it does now is sell tickets, but who really wants to buy movie tickets online?
Onward Google, onward! Search
I can't wait for 1000+ Cells in a mainframe. Do you know what the heat output is? It's based on Power4 (?) and the clock speeds are relatively low (?) so it shouldn't be too high.
Hopefully, they'll (IBM probably) develop some compilers for it (C, Fortran at least) so the scientific community can take advantage of the Cells.
You should read the history instead of blindly justifying your own opinion:
After Moses brought down the Ten Commandments from Mount Sinai, he set up a system of courts and judges to rule over the some 40,000 Jewish people traveling over the desert. One of the punishments was, yes indeed, the death penalty. If someone commits murder, you can't give them life in prison when there are no prisons, no guards, and no time or resources enough for either.
You can subjectively argue about the modern interpretation of the Ten Commandments, but the fact is: Killing was an acceptable punishment for murder, adultery, treason, and other extreme felonies in the ancient era. And, depending on where you live, it continues to be one in modern times.
I've used the command line option from a remote terminal, but I wonder how much functionality still works without the GUI. Can you still plot figures /etc? Something to try.
Strangely enough, Matlab is written in Java and its port to Solaris is SLOOOOW as hell. Literally, it's 10x slower on a Sunblade 1000 than an equivalent x86.
/w Linux are cheaper than Sun hardware /w Solaris.
You'd think Sun would have a good JVM on their own hardware, but the reality is that it sucks.
My research group is switching to Linux because 1) the software runs faster and 2) PCs
I use Fortran95 for scientific computing and the sophistication of newer compilers reduces the amount of time needed for debugging.
For example, a simple compiler won't check for writing to non-existent array elements, but a good compiler will, making one of the most onerous of bugs easily found.
The Fortran95/2k language itself is very optimized for performance. If Fortress isn't likewise optimized for performance, then many scientists/engineers will not switch. If it takes them a month to learn the language and then 10x the time to run the programs, it will vastly exceed the fraction of debugging time. (Especially since there's a lot of good bug-free Fortran code out there.)
The forall construct and where construct in Fortran95 is exactly the default parallelization of loops that you mention.
I don't know what Fortress proposes, but I doubt it will 'explode a lot of heads' like you say.
Fortran2k will extend automatic parallelization by the compiler even further. I look forward to the release of the spec.
More likely, the reviewer didn't want to say "It reads like gibberish and, consequently, I think you're an idiot" to the author.
Instead, the reviewer cites some statistics and basically writes, "Because I said so".
The term is called work, or 'useful energy'.
:)
Heat is useless energy.
Your engine burns fuel to make your car go. The work of moving the car comes from burning the fuel, but the engine is not a 100% converter of fuel to work and releases heat as a byproduct. There is a maximum efficiency of any engine based on the temperature of the engine and the outside air.
Thermodynamics for the 6th grade level.
Will they give a discount of ~$5+ for people who d/l it off Steam? I didn't mind paying full price for HL2, but for the expansion
For someone who knows all this, you didn't know what LAPACK was.
And the reason why you chimed in is because you're probably bored, an **hole, and have nothing else to do.
My last reply.
Um. Linpack is ALSO a linear algebra library.
It's the older one. LAPack is the newer one. I still don't understand why you're ranting about this.
Uh, the program could be very simple. Create a randomized A matrix (1 million x 1 million). Create a randomized b matrix (1 million). Solve for x, Ax=b, using LAPACK. If that's too difficult for the guy, then maybe he shouldn't be in charge of a major computing center. Or he can tell someone else to do it.
Solving it (using Gaussian elim or another of LAPACK's subroutines)would stress all components of the processor (not just an idle loop as many have proposed).
And you do realize that a library is just a collection of subroutines, right? Nothing special about it. (Or do you program at all???)
Uhh.... LAPACK.
LinPack also exists. From Linpack's website, "LINPACK was designed for supercomputers in use in the 1970s and early 1980s. LINPACK has been largely superceded by LAPACK, which has been designed to run efficiently on shared-memory, vector supercomputers."
But, dude, why the hate? These are subroutines that solve specifically defined linear algebra problems. They happen to consume a large amount of cpu time for large scale problems. So why the reply? Or are you just trying to flamebait?
LAPACK or LABLAS linear algebra libraries
That's what they use to spec and rank supercomputers. It'll burn, burn, burn!